Jeffrey, I know it's kind of silly to write back. But why you think a
riot is the paradigm of political change? If it is, why do government
agents send provocateurs into demonstrations to stir up violence?
xA
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Jeffrey Side <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I’m not familiar with Havel’s poetry but I expect it was more popular and more widely read than Sean or Andrea’s poetry is. Also, the political system he was writing it under was so tyrannical that it had a lot of people rooting for its downfall anyway, so Havel’s poetry was only a part of this, and not in itself the catalyst that toppled the system.
>
>
> Original Message:
>
> There seems to be a confusion about the political aspects of poetry,
> "political poetry" and "poetry that effects political change"
> (presumably, brings down the government - I guess here we have to
> point to Vaclav Havel). I think there's a difference between all these
> things, although obviously they're related. Do you really think
> Cesaire or Rukeyser or Mayakovsky or Neruda didn't effect political
> change? They were not politicians, but in their poetry they
> articulated desires and aspirations and angers that mattered to
> people. I'm not sure what else poetry can be expected to do in a
> political arena. It seems to me that Keston or Sean or Andrea are
> doing much the same kind of thing with their work, in an extremely
> complex contemporary world. I also think the kinds of changes that
> poetry can particularly effect are impossible to trace. "You must
> change your life". That kind of thing.
>
--
Editor, Masthead: http://www.masthead.net.au
Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
Home page: http://www.alisoncroggon.com
|